Lalatendu Pratap Deo Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Lalatendu Pratap Deo Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of with directions: Opposite Party No.3 (Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Koraput) to take a decision in the matter within four weeks of receipt of the order and writ petition copy; petitioner, if so advised, to make a representation to the Commission of Endowments, Odisha within that period, which the Commissioner shall consider in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to all concerned.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Koraput (Opposite Party No.3) should be made to act on the representation regarding conduct of election of Shri Jagannath Mandir-Sabara Shrikhetra, Koraput, on which he had allegedly failed to act. +1 more

Court's answer

The interest of justice would be subserved if Opposite Party No.3 (Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Koraput) is called upon to take a decision in the matter within four weeks from receipt of the order along with the copy of the writ petition; the petitioner, if so advised, shall also make a representation in this regard to the Commission of Endowments, Odisha within that period.

Ratio / Principle

In the event such a representation is made to the Commissioner of Endowments, Odisha, the learned Commissioner shall consider the same in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to all concerned.

Key takeaways

This Court has not expressed any opinion regarding the veracity of the recitals in the representation and the W.P.(C).obiter¶¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack — W.P.(C) No. 3853 of 2026 — decided 12.03.2026 by V. Narasingh, J. The petitioner, claiming to be a life member of the General Body of Shri Jagannath Mandir-Sabara Shrikhetra, Koraput, alleged that despite a General Body resolution for conducting election, the Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Koraput (OP-3) had failed to consider his representation in that regard. Learned counsel for the State objected that the petitioner had rushed to the Court without pursuing the alternative remedy of moving the Commissioner of Endowments, Odisha, and that the petition was therefore liable to be rejected. On considering the rival submissions, the Court disposed of the writ petition, calling upon OP-3 to take a decision in the matter within four weeks of receipt of the order together with the copy of the writ petition, and permitting the petitioner, if so advised, to make a representation to the Commission of Endowments, Odisha within the same period; in the event such representation is made, the Commissioner shall consider it in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to all concerned. The Court expressly recorded that it had not expressed any opinion on the veracity of the recitals in the representation and the writ petition.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No. 3853 of 2026

Lalatendu Pratap Deo ….

Petitioner

Mr. A. Tripathy, Advocate

-versus-

1. State of Odisha represented through Commissioner of Endowments, Odisha, Bhubaneswar

2. Additional Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Berhampur, Ganjam

3. Collector-cumDistrict Magistrate, Working President of Sri Jagannath Mandir, Managing Committee, Koraput. …. Opposite Parties

Mr. P.K. Ray, AGA

CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

ORDER

12.03.2026

Order No.

1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and

learned counsel for the State.

The Petitioner claims to be a life member of General body of Shri Jagannath Mandir-Sabara Shrikhetra Koraput. Asserting that in spite of the resolution passed in the General body for conducting

Page 1 of 3

election and though the Collector-cum-District Magistrate (Opposite Party No.3) was moved in the said regard alleging inaction in the matter of consideration of their representation for conducting election, the present writ petition has been filed.

Learned counsel for the State opposes such prayer of the Petitioner rushing to this Court without pursuing the alternative remedy and it is also submitted by the learned Additional Government Advocate, Mr. Ray that the Petitioner ought to have moved the Commissioner of Endowments, Odisha in this matter and he having not done so, the writ petition is liable to be rejected.

On considering the rival submission, this Court is persuaded to hold that the interest of justice would be subserved, if the Opposite Party No.3 (Collectorcum-District Magistrate, Koraput) is called upon to take a decision in the matter within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order along with the copy of the writ petition and the Petitioner, if so advised, shall also make a representation in this regard to the Commission of Endowments, Odisha within the aforesaid period.

In the event such a representation is made, the learned Commissioner shall consider the same in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to all concerned.

Page 2 of 3

It is apt to note here that this Court has not expressed any opinion regarding the veracity of the recitals in the representation and the W.P.(C).

Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

UCC as per rules.

(V. Narasingh) Judge

Santoshi

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: SANTOSHI LENKA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 13-Mar-2026 17:50:47

Page 3 of 3